Text layers in the Gita

[Robert Zydenbos]

Am Die, 27 Mär 2001 schrieb Martin Gansten:

> >Of course it is bad:  yet,  note that I merely called it "bad" only from
> >the point of view of the authors'  *original* intent.
> 
> Then you would deny that a later text could throw any light on the original
> intent of an earlier text (by dealing with the same subjects, proceeding
> from the same sort of experiences, etc)?

> Having just completed a Sanskrit-to-Swedish translation of the Gita
[...]

I hope that in your translation you have translated verse 12:1 in such a
way that _avyakta_ refers to prak.rti, like in Saa:nkhya (which is how
Madhva sees it), and not to the nirgu.na brahman (as in Sankara's
view). See my article "Is Krishna Seen Or Not? Madhvâcârya on
Bhagavadgîtâ 12:1," Journal of Vaisnava Studies 5 (3) (1997), pp.
55-63. At the time, when I was studying Madhva, I found it highly
refreshing to see how also in India in the 13th century a theologian
could, through a critical reading of the text, turn to an older
historical layer for support of his innovative doctrine. And Madhva's
commentary is a nice, old example of how a later text can bring out the
original intent of an earlier one after that intent has been obscured
by another interpretation (in German I would say an 'Umdeutung' rather
than a 'Deutung') for a few centuries.

Robert Zydenbos
Institut für Indologie und Iranistik, Universität München